| Al-Insān (The Human Being): (3) Indeed, We guided him to the way...

His saying, the Exalted: {Indeed, We guided him to the way}

Allah, the Exalted, informed that after He fashioned him and granted him the apparent and hidden senses, He clarified for him the path of guidance and the path of misguidance. In this, there are several issues:

The verse indicates that the granting of the senses precedes the granting of intellect. This is logical because, at the beginning of his innate disposition (fiṭra), the human being is devoid of knowledge of things. However, he is given instruments that assist him in acquiring that knowledge: the external and internal senses.

When he perceives sensory objects, he becomes aware of similarities and differences among them, from which he derives initial, true axiomatic beliefs (e.g., that affirmation and negation cannot coexist or be simultaneously negated, and that the whole is greater than the part). These primary cognitions are the instrument of the intellect, as their combination allows one to reach theoretical unknown matters. Thus, sensation precedes the intellect in existence. This is why it is said: "Whoever loses a sense, loses knowledge."

Some scholars who interpret the meaning of "having hearing and sight" (from the previous verse) as referring to the intellect argue that since the previous verse established the granting of intellect, this verse clarifies that the intellect was granted specifically to show him the way—to make clear what must be done and what is impermissible.

As-Sabīl (the way/path) is what is traversed. Therefore, it can mean the path of good and evil, or salvation and perdition. In this case, the meaning of {We guided him} is: We made him know and clarified the manner of each path, as in His saying: {And We guided him to the two paths} (Al-Balad: 10).

In this view, as-sabīl is a generic noun, hence its singular form, similar to {Indeed, mankind is in loss} (Al-‘Aṣr: 2).

Alternatively, as-sabīl can refer specifically to the path of guidance, as it is the path most deserving of this name absolutely. The path of misguidance is only a "way" in relation to something else. Do you not see His saying: {They said, "Our Lord, indeed we obeyed our masters and our dignitaries, and they led us astray from the way"} (Al-Aḥzāb: 67)? They only led them astray from the path of guidance.

Those who hold this latter view interpret {We guided him} as: We directed him. If one is directed to the path of truth, it implicitly necessitates avoiding what is other than it, so the wording points to both paths from this perspective.

The meaning of guiding him to the way is the creation of proofs, the creation of the guiding intellect, the sending of Prophets, and the revelation of Books. It is as if Allah is saying: I created you for trial, then I gave you everything you need {so that he who perishes might perish after clear evidence} (Al-Anfāl: 42).

It does not mean that Allah created the guidance itself. Do you not see that He mentioned the path and said: {We guided him to the way}, meaning: We showed it to him.

Al-Farra’ stated that grammatically, "We guided him the way" (haddaynāhu as-sabīl), "We guided him to the way" (ilā as-sabīl), and "We guided him for the way" (li as-sabīl) are all permissible.

His saying, the Exalted: {Either grateful or ungrateful}

In this, there are several issues:

There are several opinions regarding the status of shākiran (grateful) and kafūran (ungrateful):

The First Opinion: They are circumstantial states (ḥāl) referring back to the pronoun hu (him) in {We guided him to the way}. The meaning is: We guided him to the way while he was in the state of being grateful or ungrateful. This implies that everything related to God's guidance and direction is completed whether the person is in a state of disbelief or faith.

The Second Opinion: Shākiran and kafūran are in the accusative case due to an implied kāna (was). The structure is: Whether he was grateful or whether he was ungrateful.

The Third Opinion: The meaning is: We guided him to the way so that he might be either grateful or ungrateful. This means that his gratitude may be distinguished from his ingratitude, and his obedience from his disobedience, similar to {to test you as to which of you is best in deed} (Hūd: 7), and {And certainly did We try those before them, and Allah will surely make evident those who are truthful} (Al-‘Ankabūt: 3), and {And We will surely test you until We make evident those who strive among you [for the cause of Allah] and the patient} (Muḥammad: 31).

Al-Qaffāl said that the implication of this interpretation is like saying: "I have advised you; if you wish, accept, and if you wish, leave it." The fa' (then) is omitted, so the meaning is: "We guided him to the way, so either grateful or ungrateful." This omission might also carry a threat: "We guided him to the way; let him be ungrateful if he wishes, or grateful if he wishes, for We have prepared for the ungrateful such and such, and for the grateful such and such," like {And say, 'The truth is from your Lord. So whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve'} (Al-Kahf: 29).

The Fourth Opinion: They are circumstantial states referring to as-sabīl (the way). Meaning: We showed him a way, either a grateful way or an ungrateful way. Describing the path with gratitude or ingratitude is metaphorical.

The Fifth Opinion (The one conforming to the Ahl al-Sunnah doctrine and preferred by Al-Farra’): The idham here is like the idham in {or He will punish them, or He will accept their repentance} (At-Tawbah: 106). The structure is: {Indeed, We guided him to the way}, and then We made him sometimes grateful, or sometimes ungrateful.

This interpretation is strengthened by the narration that Abū as-Samāl recited the hamza of ammā with a fatḥa (i.e., ammā instead of immā). The meaning then becomes: As for the grateful one, it is by Our success (tawfīq), and as for the ungrateful one, it is by Our abandonment (khidhlan).

The Mu'tazila argue that this interpretation is false because Allah follows this verse with a threat to the disbelievers: {Indeed, We have prepared for the disbelievers chains and shackles and a blazing Fire} (Al-Insān: 4). If the disbeliever's disbelief were from God and created by Him, it would not be permissible for God to threaten him for it.

Since this interpretation is invalidated, the truth must be the first interpretation: Allah guided all accountable beings, whether they believed or disbelieved. This refutes the doctrine of the Jabriyya (Determinists) who claim Allah did not guide the disbeliever to faith.

Our scholars respond: Since Allah knew the disbeliever would not believe, yet commanded him to believe, He commanded him to combine the knowledge of non-belief with the existence of belief—a command to combine two contradictory things. If this does not serve as an excuse for the threat and warning to be dropped, then it is equally possible that He creates the disbelief in him, and this still does not serve as an excuse for the warning to be dropped. Once this is established, this interpretation is correct, and the interpretation favored by the Mu'tazila is false, thus refuting the Mu'tazila position.

Allah mentioned His favors upon man, beginning with worldly blessings, followed by religious blessings, and then He mentioned this division (into grateful or ungrateful).

It is impossible to interpret the grateful (shākir) and the ungrateful (kafūr) as those actively engaged in the act of thanking or the act of disbelief, because that would negate the comprehensiveness of the division (the ḥaṣr).

Rather, the grateful one is he who acknowledges and affirms the obligation to thank his Creator for it. The ungrateful one is he who does not affirm the obligation to thank Him, either because he denies the Creator, or because, even if he affirms the Creator, he denies the obligation of gratitude. Under this definition, the division is comprehensive: the accountable person is either one who affirms gratitude or one who denies it.

The Khawārij used this verse as proof that there is no intermediate state between the obedient and the disbeliever, arguing that the grateful is the obedient, and the ungrateful is the disbeliever, and Allah negated any intermediary. This would imply that every sin is disbelief, and every sinner is a disbeliever.

However, the clarification we summarized refutes this problem. The grateful cannot mean one who is actively performing the act of thanks, as that is false both ways:

1. Forward: A Jew might be grateful to his Lord yet not obedient to Him, and a sinner might be grateful to his Lord yet not obedient to Him.
2. Reverse: A believer might not be actively engaged in thanks or disbelief, but rather be heedless and silent regarding both.

Therefore, it is established that shākir must mean one who affirms the obligation of thanks, and kafūr one who denies it. Under this definition, the division is comprehensive, and their question is entirely dismissed. And Allah knows best.

**7 < {Indeed, We have prepared for the disbelievers chains and shackles and a blazing Fire. * Indeed, the righteous will drink from a cup whose mixture is from the camphor [of Paradise]. } 7

<**